17 ms·

Nintendo Is Taking Down My Videos [video]

182 points by stefandesu 3y ago

stefandesu 3y ago
Nintendo has been issuing copyright strikes against content creators that use gameplay footage of their games, even though it is clearly allowed by their Content Guidelines. This is mostly, but not only, Zelda Breath of the Wild content, and mostly, but not only, modded game content. It is putting the livelihoods of those content creators in danger. Apparently the creator in question (PointCrow) hasn't heard anything back from Nintendo after contacting them about the issue. I feel like this is yet another example of a large company acting in a way that hurts both their customers and themselves. I don't think it costs them anything to allow the creators to make that kind of content; rather it will make people more aware of their games, potentially increasing sales. The most prominent of these creators will now be very wary of posting content about the upcoming Zelda Tears of the Kingdom game which will most certainly hurt initial sales of the game.
- encryptluks2 3y ago
  > It is putting the livelihoods of those content creators in danger. If Nintendo has shown to be hostile towards their own userbase, then really the only complaints should be about existing content. If creators keep paying for Nintendo games and content now that they've seen how they act, then the creators bear a substantial amount of blame going forward.
  - stefandesu 3y ago
    I guess you have a point, but I personally wouldn't blame creators for sticking with Nintendo games if that's the primary thing they're doing and moving away from Nintendo would mean completely reinventing their business. It's like telling Apple developers who complain about Apple's bad developer relations to move to a different platform. I don't blame developers (or users) for these issues because I completely understand not wanting to transition your whole life and career to a different platform that you might enjoy less.
    - manuelmoreale 3y ago
      > if that's the primary thing they're doing and moving away from Nintendo would mean completely reinventing their business. Isn’t that just part of the risk you accept by doing that kind of job? Every job has some risks attached to it and this is not unusual behavior for Nintendo.
- mjr00 3y ago
  > I feel like this is yet another example of a large company acting in a way that hurts both their customers and themselves. This is pretty specifically a Nintendo thing. Sony, MS, and pretty much every major game studio are fine with people streaming content of their game, even mods. Hell, it usually ends up being the opposite--game studios offer 6 or 7 figure deals to popular streamers to play their game as marketing play. Worked for Apex Legends. Nintendo has always been really, really aggressive about this, to the point where it doesn't make sense. They've aggressively cracked down on fan projects (e.g. AM2R) which is at least arguably justifiable from a copyright/IP perspective. But they've also threatened to take down any speedrun video with a Nintendo game in it. And they had a major row with EVO about whether Smash could even be played at the tournament a few years back; during a time when companies were throwing tens of millions of dollars to get into the esports scene, Nintendo was refusing a handout on a golden platter.
  - simoncion 3y ago
    > ...during a time when companies were throwing tens of millions of dollars to get into the esports scene, Nintendo was refusing a handout on a golden platter. The E-sports scene is kinda awful, to be honest. Historically, Nintendo has been interested in making fun and interesting toys for people to play with. E-sports people are usually VERY SERIOUS about what they do, and often VERY PARTICULAR about how games work, and VERY VOCAL about changes to a game that radically changes how they've become accustomed to playing the game. Catering to money-making E-sports is generally incompatible with making fun and interesting toys... they're just two radically different and largely incompatible audiences.
    - smcl 3y ago
      > they're just two radically different and largely incompatible audiences This is incorrect, and I think you're maybe missing some context. What is being referred to here isn't esports players being whiny or particular about changing a game in a way that would hurt casual users. What's happened a few times recently is that Nintendo were very heavy handed in cracking down on things like Smash Brothers e-sports tournaments: https://www.theverge.com/2022/11/30/23485811/nintendo-smash-world-tour-shut-down-event-tournament https://www.theverge.com/2022/11/30/23485811/nintendo-smash-... So here they have already made a game that is beloved by both casual players and professional players, and they seem really keen on cracking down on the latter group. They don't need to take any special steps to cater to e-sports players or tournaments, they just needed to not go out of their way to crack down on them.
- simoncion 3y ago
  > The most prominent of these creators will now be very wary of posting content about the upcoming Zelda Tears of the Kingdom game which will most certainly hurt initial sales of the game. Eh, that _might_ hurt initial sales of the game. Or it might promote sales of the game, given that prominent video game streamers won't be streaming it, so it'll be more difficult to "play" the game by watching someone else play it. I know that I've not purchased many games that I otherwise would have (and would have had a good time with) because I watched someone's recorded gameplay video.
  - tpxl 3y ago
    > I know that I've not purchased many games that I otherwise would have I, on the other hand, never purchase a game without watching gameplay footage, and have bought games I've watched people play, that I ended up never playing, or playing for only a couple of hours.
    - simoncion 3y ago
      > I, on the other hand, never purchase a game without watching gameplay footage... Good promotional materials provide lots of gameplay footage, and Nintendo's definitely a company that I'd trust to not misrepresent the nature of their games and toys in the promotional materials. Regardless, I'm quite aware that there are variety of folks out there with a variety of purchasing habits. I was responding in large part to the absolutist, histrionic statements made by the OP: > It is putting the livelihoods of those content creators in danger ... I feel like this is yet another example of a large company acting in a way that hurts both their customers and themselves. I don't think it costs them anything to allow the creators to make that kind of content; rather it will make people more aware of their games[.] [These actions] will most certainly hurt initial sales of the game. (It's almost as if OP isn't aware that Nintendo, the Nintendo Switch, and Zelda are -among households that play video games- household names, and that Nintendo has a _substantially capable_ marketing and audience surveying department.)
      - stefandesu 3y ago
        > (It's almost as if OP isn't aware that Nintendo, the Nintendo Switch, and Zelda are -among households that play video games- household names, and that Nintendo has a _substantially capable_ marketing and audience surveying department.) I concur that 1) we can't say for sure what effect it would have on sales if prominent content creators did not cover the game, and 2) even if there's a negative impact on sales, it could be negligibly small. However, I'm still convinced that having big content creators cover your new game release would not hurt sales, and I'm also convinced that Nintendo has nothing to gain from these actions in terms of money or reputation. Even if it only ever reaches a small minority of people right now, I believe that they are damaging their reputation and lose trust, not only with content creators, but with the players as well. And that's just sad.
- bachmeier 3y ago
  You're talking about the company that sold Mario Maker to six year olds, then deleted the games they created without warning or explanation. The only thing parents remember about that ** was the crying. That was the end of Nintendo anything in our house.
  - pharrington 3y ago
    Can you explain this? Super Mario Maker 1 levels are still up and playable.
    - bachmeier 3y ago
      They deleted most content uploaded by kids. More explanation here: https://web.archive.org/web/20160324122025/http://kotaku.com/nintendo-is-deleting-peoples-mario-maker-stages-without-1753248157 https://web.archive.org/web/20160324122025/http://kotaku.com...
      - pharrington 3y ago
        So there literally is an explanation from Nintendo. Did you explain to your kids that their levels are still on their Wii U storage?
        bachmeier 3y ago
        I'll exit this conversation, but if you click the link, you'll see that the title is "Nintendo Is Deleting People's Mario Maker Stages Without Telling Them Why". The summary paragraph says, "Ultimately, the lack of communication is what’s frustrating. If Nintendo wants to have strict policies, that’s fine, but let creators know what they’re dealing with, so they can work around it. Not everyone has a million Twitter followers they can easily share a level with, so it’s unfortunate that some well-made stages may be permanently gone simply because they got lost in the noise." If you have a beef with the article, you'll have to contact the author.
        3y ago
- KennyBlanken 3y ago
  > Nintendo has been issuing copyright strikes against content creators that use gameplay footage of their games, even though it is clearly allowed by their Content Guidelines Would everyone please stop pretending like a company's "content guidelines" can enforce any restrictions on fair use purposes? Making a cosplay costume of a character is fair use. Making a video of you playing a game is fair use. Fan art about a video game is fair use. 'Content guidelines' pretend to "give" you rights you already have, and then threaten to take them away if you do thinks they don't like.
spiderfarmer 3y ago
How do companies the size of Nintendo decide to take down content? Is it a whole procedure or is there a low level employee who's task it is to mark checkboxes who when he/she has a bad day decides to block everything in the pipeline instead of researching it? I can't believe Nintendo would choose to create drama like this before the release of their most anticipated game in years.
- autoexec 3y ago
  My guess, based on dealing with DMCA notices in other contexts, is that Nintendo doesn't decide at all. They hire a third party who scours the internet for stuff that might be infringing and that third party uses automated tools to fire off complaints and notices without anyone at Nintendo even being aware of any one particular instance at all until after it starts generating bad press. Youtube gets the notices and, without anyone at youtube ever being aware of any particular instance either, Google's automated system is what actually takes down a video. It's all automated systems sending notices and automated systems carrying out take downs, with companies who are routinely careless about sending DMCA notices on one end, and on the other end you have one of the richest corporations on the planet who still can't be bothered to pay a human to double check before they ruin someone's livelihood, or even to help clean up after their automation screws up.
charcircuit 3y ago
This is the danger of not properly licensing the content you use in your videos. In the video game industry it's very common for games to not license their game to be used in videos. These game companies like the fact they have the power to enforce their copyright on any video they so wish to have taken down. They don't want to give up this power so they avoid licensing it except to a very limited number of other companies. To help content creators be aware of what they will target they sometimes release guidelines [0]. These guideline are not actually a license to use the copyrighted material, but are just a guide for what will likely not be targeted by whoever is doing copyright enforcement. Content creators seem fine to not get rights for the games they make videos about and companies like the power they have to remove any video they wish so this trend continues. This is so common there are businesses like Twitch that are almost excessively built on top of this copyright infringement that game companies chosen not to pursue. [0] https://www.nintendo.co.jp/networkservice_guideline/en/index.html https://www.nintendo.co.jp/networkservice_guideline/en/index...
- Aardwolf 3y ago
  > These game companies like the fact they have the power to enforce their copyright on any video they so wish to have taken down. How does this help their profitability? Given that such videos are free advertising.
  - charcircuit 3y ago
    >How does this help their profitability? You can maintain your brand image. If some really problematic usage of your IP happens you can get it taken down. If that person had a license for making videos of the game you wouldn't have the ability to get the content taken down and your brand image could be hurt which could affect sales and hurt profitability. >Given that such videos are free advertising. 99% of videos will be fine fine which is why you don't see companies getting videos taken down left and right. They reap the benefits of these videos, but they want to have the power to take things down just in case. Even if they never need to take anything down just having the power to just in case can be valuable to the company.
  - jrockway 3y ago
noirscape 3y ago
This specifically happened because the guy put a financial bounty on a multiplayer mod for Breath of the Wild. Nintendo has always been fairly straightforward on this sorta thing if you look at their actions: 1. Don't make them care. Don't draw attention to yourself, just do what you want to do. Relatedly, don't talk to Vice, Polygon, Kotaku or any other authoritative source because then you'll be competing with Nintendo in the press for relevance, and that'll make them upset. 2. No piracy. Nintendo has a very wide definition of piracy, which includes emulation if it has the possibility of being done through piracy (which is most emulation but not most emulation development). Specifically don't do anything that can directly enable piracy, such as dumping ROMs or say... trying to organize a Melee tournament using a Dolphin netplay mod. 3. No money. Money makes things complicated and will make Nintendo care. Just straight up - you're going to need to do it pro bono. If you expect financial benefits of any kind, just go elsewhere. 4. Don't directly compete with Nintendo - no direct sequels or remakes. Otherwise they'll turn a blind eye. This guy violated point 1 and point 3; tech blogs wrote about him and he put up a financial bounty for it.
- realusername 3y ago
  Those aren't up to them to decide, there's laws. Emulation, romhacks and mods are perfectly legal whatever they think.
  - derefr 3y ago
    These creators are almost always benefitting from Nintendo voluntarily turning a blind eye to the creator’s use/sampling of Nintendo IP in their content without any kind of IP licensing agreement. Whether some behavior is legal or not, if Nintendo doesn’t like it, they are free to respond by taking issue with the actually-illegal thing you’re doing (using their IP without licensing it.) A.k.a. “If you don’t want to play by my rules, I’m taking my ball with me when I go home.” (Keep in mind that by a strict interpretation of IP law, everyone making gameplay videos of Nintendo’s games owes Nintendo royalties on revenue from those videos, just as much as musicians that sample other artists’ music owe those musicians royalties on revenue from that music.)
snvzz 3y ago
There's no concept of "fair use" in Japan. Nintendo has a hard time with the fact Japan law does not apply in the west.
- jrockway 3y ago
  Isn't copyright based on international treaties? They no doubt signed the same constitution-overriding stuff we did.
- Algent 3y ago
  This isn't that simple, Youtube having a legal existence in many countries they have to respect more than just US laws.
  - jeroenhd 3y ago
    They definitely must follow Japanese law for their Japanese customers. That doesn't mean Japanese law applies to all of their customers worldwide, though.
    - charcircuit 3y ago
      The copyright law that applies to a work is the copyright law from the country the work was created in. Japanese works fall under Japanese copyright law for all customers worldwide.
      - schrijver 3y ago
        Source? Copyright applies where the work is distributed. If you sell a counterfeit Japanese book in Germany, the Japanese publisher will need to sue in a German court. That makes sense because Japanese laws and courts have no bearing on German nationals (unless they are in Japan). Copyright still works internationally, since what constitutes infraction in your own country is probably an infraction abroad as well. Most countries have signed the Berne convention and have very similar copyright laws. Yet there are still differences, for example the length of time it takes for a work to enter in the public domain, and local markets reflect this. Things are complicated online, since platforms based in one country distribute to many other countries, and so they open themselves up to liabilities in many countries. Where platforms don’t have the resources to differentiate by country, they might choose the most restrictive available interpretation…
techaqua 3y ago
remember when nintendo tried to make their own mcn. basically if you make nintendo related content, nintendo will take a pay cut or you get copystrike.
jeroenhd 3y ago
Video game companies seem to have this weird urge to hurt any fan created content any way they can. I don't understand why anyone would put effort into Nintendo games by the way their business practices are just incompatible with how internet entertainment works. It's simply a terrible company to be a fan of. It's quite comedic how they build some of the most hackable consoles while at the same time pretending that any kind of emulation will get you the death sentence. A real bummer, because many of their devices are quite good handheld emulation machines for old games that no reasonable person will ever pay for again and the comparatively low specs of their hardware make games excellently playable on other platforms.
smcl 3y ago
I think there's another side of this that is being glossed over. While Nintendo are being a bit overbearing (and IMO self-defeating), they're sending these takedowns to YouTube who are happily executing them, and are seemingly uninterested as to whether they're without merit. Now I know that this is nothing new, YouTube and Google generally are famously indifferent to their users, but I think it's important not to ignore this.
- stefandesu 3y ago
  Yeah, this is definitely an issue that comes up with YouTube again and again, and it doesn't seem to be getting any better. I still understand that creators stick with YouTube, especially because there's nothing like it out there in terms of reach for long-form content.
- coldpie 3y ago
  Well, YouTube is kind of in a hard place. There are massive penalties for hosting others' IP, and basically no penalties for not doing that. The incentives are strongly aligned with taking content down if there's any hint that it may be infringing. If you'd like that to change, then you need to change the incentives -- the laws. YouTube is just operating in the system Disney and Cher created.
  - smcl 3y ago
    I understand that laws are weird and that you'd want to err on the side of caution. I don't understand that it's so easy to get someone's content taken down to the extent that (for example) a DMCA takedown request is a common retaliatory tactic between YouTubers when they're beefing, and that there's little recourse other than getting enough people Tweeting about it that a YouTube exec stumbles upon the issue during their morning coffee. I also don't understand why there's seemingly no process to revisit such strikes, or get a human involved in the process. I guess there's some section of their TOS stating "we might just nuke your account because we feel like it" so they're legally in the right to do whatever they feel like. Just feels like such a weird way to operate such a business - to just go completely hands-off and let all participants tear each other apart via content reporting or takedown requests.
jchw 3y ago
Well, regardless of what you think about who is in the right morally and legally, I will say one thing: Nintendo sure knows how to take an opportunity for good PR and turn it into a PR nightmare for essentially no gain. Nintendo definitely manages to succeed in spite of their corporate antics and absolutely not as a result of them.
- bragr 3y ago
  >Nintendo sure knows how to take an opportunity for good PR and turn it into a PR nightmare for essentially no gain. Nintendo definitely manages to succeed in spite of their corporate antics and absolutely not as a result of them. Counterpoint: maybe none of the people they have drama with are their core customers. Nintendo seems to have a similar "Disney Adult" problem as Disney where you have a population of vocal adults who think they are the core customer, but in reality the company moved on to selling to those people's children or grandchildren years ago.
  - viraptor 3y ago
    Pointcrow is not really their customer. He's their free marketing service. Most of his content seems to be based on Nintendo games - and that works for at least some of the actual customer base. Reviews and trailers are fun and all, but I think every game I bought in the last few years was a result of me seeing a stream of someone having fun playing it. I know others who do the same. They essentially put an advertisement of how much they suck in place of a free ad space they were given.
    - bragr 3y ago
      >He's their free marketing service. Is he though? Looking about his top videos, I see lots of "pro gaming" or speedruns, so I circle back to my earlier question of who is their core audience? I suspect this kind of content doesn't move the needle on units sold very much.
      - viraptor 3y ago
jtwebman 3y ago
They own the IP they can do what they e want. Seem like every few years some creator freaks out because they didn't like what you did and take it down. It is in their right to do so. Free Use can only be decided by a judge in the US. Until more band together a fight then nothing will change.
- fasterik 3y ago
  Fair use means exactly the opposite of what you're saying. Companies who own IP can't do whatever they want. If use of a copyrighted work is transformative, it falls under fair use. It's true that it's up to the courts to decide whether specific works are transformative, but that doesn't justify game companies abusing individual content creators who don't have the financial means to defend themselves.
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    > If use of a copyrighted work is transformative, it falls under fair use. Not necessarily. Being transformative may weigh in favor of fair use, but it isn’t automatically fair use.
senko 3y ago
From 5:35 in the video: > So, if you've uploaded any video that features any Nintendo content no matter how transformative or directly in line with their published guidelines, you are at risk. Nintendo does as it always does. The problem here is in the copyright, DMCA and related laws that allow such broadly nonsensical interpretation that large corporation with a sizable legal team can successfully threaten anyone touching stuff that falls under the copyright. Yeah, it might be fair use, and how big is your legal budget again?
egypturnash 3y ago
Cut and paste from the tiny little transcript window because I don't wanna watch this guy talk for eight minutes and maybe you don't want to either: ---- so Nintendo has decided to take down the my and other content creators videos I ask that you watch this whole video so you understand the entire situation because it affects you and the content creators that you may Support also this is a prepared statement reviewed by my lawyer so if it seems like I'm reading from a script uh it's because I am my main hope is that if somebody at Nintendo watches this they will listen to what I have to say and consider reversing the decision to claim these videos so uh hi I'm Eric or Point Crow I make videos playing games sometimes in strange ways but for today it's important for you to know that on occasion I modify the games I play and explore what happens when the game mechanics are a little different most recently I modified The Legend of Zelda breath of the wild to become a multiplayer game to be clear I have never encouraged piracy of Nintendo's games the mods that I've commissioned are not being sold and all of the code is custom meaning that they are free of Nintendo assets on April 6th one week ago Nintendo decided to block all four videos that I put up on YouTube playing the multiplayer mod I appealed their decision as I'm very much in line with their content guideline policies we'll go over that in a moment and these videos are fair use Nintendo then escalated and issued a copyright strike against my YouTube channel not once but twice rather than bundle the videos all into one copyright strike Nintendo issued a copyright strike for one video and then bundled the other three into another strike deliberately putting my channel in danger but not taking it down completely I was able to get an email address for Nintendo and sent a message asking that we discuss what's going on and try to reach an amicable resolution that would make both parties happy I heard nothing back so far here's that email if you would like to read it so the next day Nintendo claimed 24 more of my videos from my channels most of them are modded content a lot of them are breath of the Wild but not all of them are this is key they also claimed videos containing footage from Super Mario Odyssey the Pokemon series and Wii Sports Resort from my channel the most surprising one though was a claim from one of my first videos back in 2019 marrying seiden and a bookshelf to create hyrule's first car it's just a regular vanilla gameplay video of breath of the wild these takedowns aren't exclusive to my channel either over the course of the next couple days Nintendo was taking down videos from other channels as well Croton another very prominent YouTuber has had at least 10 live streams and two videos removed importantly one of those videos is simply a challenge video detailing how the game would be played if the player decided to explore Zelda with certain restrictions the player has imposed on themselves these takedowns may have started with modded content but they have spiraled into something else entirely so now you know what's happening uh at this time my channel has had 29 videos taken down two copyright strikes and Nintendo does not seem to be stopping the removal of videos from other creators on YouTube so let me really Levy the importance of this on you the viewer Nintendo is sending takedowns and Strikes against the creators showing content of their games it's not just modded content they've shown that they're striking down regular gameplay videos as well it's sporadic and their enforcement of their copyright is incredibly uneven the thing is without even considering fair use all of these videos are very clearly in line with Nintendo's own game content guidelines for online video and image sharing platforms which I will include in the description below I will also read it for you here from their FAQ what types of content are acceptable under the guidelines what types of content are not acceptable we encourage you to use Nintendo game content in videos and images that feature your creative input and commentary for example let's play videos and video game reviews are within the scope of the guidelines however you may not simply upload a live stream of an existing Nintendo video gameplay footage without your own creative inputs or a copy of content created by someone else for example mirror copies of Nintendo promotional trailers tournaments music soundtracks gameplay sequences and art collections are outside the scope of the guidelines you might argue that modded content is in violation of these guidelines but historically that's not the case the terms of service for the Legend of Zelda says you cannot modify the game but it also says that you cannot stream it you cannot make videos of it and you cannot otherwise broadcast it a Nintendo's game content guidelines changes this though by providing a license on top of the existing terms of service which modifies the terms of service for Content creators all of the videos that they have taken down are in compliance with their own policies I use Nintendo game content in my videos and they are all featuring my creative input and commentary throughout the duration of the medium now this is a little scary because the president that they set uh with this case may apply heavily for their upcoming release of The Legend of Zelda tears of the Kingdom as per their decisions to take down gameplay and Challenge videos alongside the modified content it'll be difficult for any content creator to post Creative Concepts without having the fear of Nintendo exercising their copyright over video that is in line with their own policies in fact what they've demonstrated here is that they will ignore their own policies and licenses to selectively enforce their intellectual property so if you've uploaded any video that features any Nintendo content no matter how transformative or directly in line with their published guidelines you are at risk giving these decisions I'm hesitant to post videos of myself playing tears of the Kingdom even with my creative input and commentary for fear that they will also be taken down I hope that is not the case so uh what am I going to do nothing um I can't do much of anything about this other than plead with Nintendo and move away from this kind of content my other option is to appeal the dmca notices and risk a multi-million dollar lawsuit so even if I'm in the right here that risks my channel my livelihood and the livelihoods of my team I don't want to go through that and I'm left questioning the future of the content that I'm allowed to make so I'm releasing this video informing you all of what's going on in this community and using this as an open letter to Nintendo so here's my explicit message to Nintendo I love the games that you make the stories you tell the ideas that you explore from giving me the closest moments that I've had with my friends to my Mom calling every electronic device I own a Nintendo you mentioned in your content guidelines that you are humbled every day but the loyalty and passion for Nintendo's Games characters and world and respect that we want to be able to express ourselves creatively by sharing our own videos and images using content from your game if you truly respect us and are humbled by this community don't take this creativity away from us these channels you've targeted these videos you're claiming are from some of the people that are most passionate about your games you're stifling that imagination and punishing those who want to share it with others when they do it in the way that you have outlined for us creators please remove these strikes and claims or at least start a dialogue with us so we can figure this out and all move forward with the excitement I'm sure you would love to see about your future games you have my contact information already from the dmca and the email that I've sent uh I'll be waiting eagerly for your response so thanks ---- (This is YouTube's auto-generated transcript, no editing or formatting applied.)
colonwqbang 3y ago
It makes me wonder why people like him bother with it in the first place. Why help market Nintendo games and contribute to their ecosystem, when they clearly don't care about you at all and will happily throw you under the bus. This isn't anything new, Nintendo has been behaving this way for many years.
- asynchronous 3y ago
  Unfortunately it’s because Nintendo despite their draconian approach and awful antics makes darn good video games.
phendrenad2 3y ago
Not mentioned in the headline: most of the videos were of modded versions of the game, which likely violate the DMCA.
nfriedly 3y ago
I have some fond memories of Nintendo games from my childhood, but I've basically sworn them off as an adult, due specifically to these kinds of abusive behaviors. I'd kind of like to play Breath of the wild, or some of the newer Pokemon games. But not enough to support this kind of nonsense. These days, most of my gaming happens on a PC, with a little bit on Android. If a game isn't available there, then I just probably won't play it. (I know there's emulation, but meh.) When my son got interested in gaming, I didn't buy him a switch - we built a PC together. Nintendo is slowly but surely killing themselves.
- dmcgillen 3y ago
  As much as I commend your position, having just recently bought a Switch with Mario Odyssey and BotW I would say you're missing out on some really good stuff. I've had about a 5 year or so gap in gaming due to adult life getting in the way, but it's been really fun getting back into it. Their behaviour in this regard really does disappoint me though, it's a completely unnecessary way to treat some of your biggest fans.
  - nfriedly 3y ago
    Yeah, fair enough. I'm not going to fault anyone who doesn't take the same stance that I do. It's a bit easier for me partially just because I don't have all that much time to game anyways. I think I might average 1 game a year completed, and a few others started - I just finished Control, after starting it sometime last year.
Zuiii 3y ago
I wonder why amaricans are silent with a foreign company abusing laws to stifle and destroy their budding talent pools like this. Each time nintendo twists the law to dish out illegal abuse, it drives talented people elsewhere. I'm sure it already had a real negative effect on US overall ability to compete with other countries. I guess I just don't understand why they don't get penalized for abusing the rights of US citizens.

182 points by stefandesu 3y ago

Nintendo has been issuing copyright strikes against content creators that use gameplay footage of their games, even though it is clearly allowed by their Content Guidelines. This is mostly, but not only, Zelda Breath of the Wild content, and mostly, but not only, modded game content. It is putting the livelihoods of those content creators in danger. Apparently the creator in question (PointCrow) hasn't heard anything back from Nintendo after contacting them about the issue. I feel like this is yet another example of a large company acting in a way that hurts both their customers and themselves. I don't think it costs them anything to allow the creators to make that kind of content; rather it will make people more aware of their games, potentially increasing sales. The most prominent of these creators will now be very wary of posting content about the upcoming Zelda Tears of the Kingdom game which will most certainly hurt initial sales of the game.

encryptluks2 3y ago
> It is putting the livelihoods of those content creators in danger. If Nintendo has shown to be hostile towards their own userbase, then really the only complaints should be about existing content. If creators keep paying for Nintendo games and content now that they've seen how they act, then the creators bear a substantial amount of blame going forward.
- stefandesu 3y ago
  I guess you have a point, but I personally wouldn't blame creators for sticking with Nintendo games if that's the primary thing they're doing and moving away from Nintendo would mean completely reinventing their business. It's like telling Apple developers who complain about Apple's bad developer relations to move to a different platform. I don't blame developers (or users) for these issues because I completely understand not wanting to transition your whole life and career to a different platform that you might enjoy less.
  - manuelmoreale 3y ago
    > if that's the primary thing they're doing and moving away from Nintendo would mean completely reinventing their business. Isn’t that just part of the risk you accept by doing that kind of job? Every job has some risks attached to it and this is not unusual behavior for Nintendo.
mjr00 3y ago
> I feel like this is yet another example of a large company acting in a way that hurts both their customers and themselves. This is pretty specifically a Nintendo thing. Sony, MS, and pretty much every major game studio are fine with people streaming content of their game, even mods. Hell, it usually ends up being the opposite--game studios offer 6 or 7 figure deals to popular streamers to play their game as marketing play. Worked for Apex Legends. Nintendo has always been really, really aggressive about this, to the point where it doesn't make sense. They've aggressively cracked down on fan projects (e.g. AM2R) which is at least arguably justifiable from a copyright/IP perspective. But they've also threatened to take down any speedrun video with a Nintendo game in it. And they had a major row with EVO about whether Smash could even be played at the tournament a few years back; during a time when companies were throwing tens of millions of dollars to get into the esports scene, Nintendo was refusing a handout on a golden platter.
- simoncion 3y ago
  > ...during a time when companies were throwing tens of millions of dollars to get into the esports scene, Nintendo was refusing a handout on a golden platter. The E-sports scene is kinda awful, to be honest. Historically, Nintendo has been interested in making fun and interesting toys for people to play with. E-sports people are usually VERY SERIOUS about what they do, and often VERY PARTICULAR about how games work, and VERY VOCAL about changes to a game that radically changes how they've become accustomed to playing the game. Catering to money-making E-sports is generally incompatible with making fun and interesting toys... they're just two radically different and largely incompatible audiences.
  - smcl 3y ago
    > they're just two radically different and largely incompatible audiences This is incorrect, and I think you're maybe missing some context. What is being referred to here isn't esports players being whiny or particular about changing a game in a way that would hurt casual users. What's happened a few times recently is that Nintendo were very heavy handed in cracking down on things like Smash Brothers e-sports tournaments: https://www.theverge.com/2022/11/30/23485811/nintendo-smash-world-tour-shut-down-event-tournament https://www.theverge.com/2022/11/30/23485811/nintendo-smash-... So here they have already made a game that is beloved by both casual players and professional players, and they seem really keen on cracking down on the latter group. They don't need to take any special steps to cater to e-sports players or tournaments, they just needed to not go out of their way to crack down on them.
simoncion 3y ago
> The most prominent of these creators will now be very wary of posting content about the upcoming Zelda Tears of the Kingdom game which will most certainly hurt initial sales of the game. Eh, that _might_ hurt initial sales of the game. Or it might promote sales of the game, given that prominent video game streamers won't be streaming it, so it'll be more difficult to "play" the game by watching someone else play it. I know that I've not purchased many games that I otherwise would have (and would have had a good time with) because I watched someone's recorded gameplay video.
- tpxl 3y ago
  > I know that I've not purchased many games that I otherwise would have I, on the other hand, never purchase a game without watching gameplay footage, and have bought games I've watched people play, that I ended up never playing, or playing for only a couple of hours.
  - simoncion 3y ago
    > I, on the other hand, never purchase a game without watching gameplay footage... Good promotional materials provide lots of gameplay footage, and Nintendo's definitely a company that I'd trust to not misrepresent the nature of their games and toys in the promotional materials. Regardless, I'm quite aware that there are variety of folks out there with a variety of purchasing habits. I was responding in large part to the absolutist, histrionic statements made by the OP: > It is putting the livelihoods of those content creators in danger ... I feel like this is yet another example of a large company acting in a way that hurts both their customers and themselves. I don't think it costs them anything to allow the creators to make that kind of content; rather it will make people more aware of their games[.] [These actions] will most certainly hurt initial sales of the game. (It's almost as if OP isn't aware that Nintendo, the Nintendo Switch, and Zelda are -among households that play video games- household names, and that Nintendo has a _substantially capable_ marketing and audience surveying department.)
    - stefandesu 3y ago
      > (It's almost as if OP isn't aware that Nintendo, the Nintendo Switch, and Zelda are -among households that play video games- household names, and that Nintendo has a _substantially capable_ marketing and audience surveying department.) I concur that 1) we can't say for sure what effect it would have on sales if prominent content creators did not cover the game, and 2) even if there's a negative impact on sales, it could be negligibly small. However, I'm still convinced that having big content creators cover your new game release would not hurt sales, and I'm also convinced that Nintendo has nothing to gain from these actions in terms of money or reputation. Even if it only ever reaches a small minority of people right now, I believe that they are damaging their reputation and lose trust, not only with content creators, but with the players as well. And that's just sad.
bachmeier 3y ago
You're talking about the company that sold Mario Maker to six year olds, then deleted the games they created without warning or explanation. The only thing parents remember about that ** was the crying. That was the end of Nintendo anything in our house.
- pharrington 3y ago
  Can you explain this? Super Mario Maker 1 levels are still up and playable.
  - bachmeier 3y ago
    They deleted most content uploaded by kids. More explanation here: https://web.archive.org/web/20160324122025/http://kotaku.com/nintendo-is-deleting-peoples-mario-maker-stages-without-1753248157 https://web.archive.org/web/20160324122025/http://kotaku.com...
    - pharrington 3y ago
      So there literally is an explanation from Nintendo. Did you explain to your kids that their levels are still on their Wii U storage?
      - bachmeier 3y ago
        I'll exit this conversation, but if you click the link, you'll see that the title is "Nintendo Is Deleting People's Mario Maker Stages Without Telling Them Why". The summary paragraph says, "Ultimately, the lack of communication is what’s frustrating. If Nintendo wants to have strict policies, that’s fine, but let creators know what they’re dealing with, so they can work around it. Not everyone has a million Twitter followers they can easily share a level with, so it’s unfortunate that some well-made stages may be permanently gone simply because they got lost in the noise." If you have a beef with the article, you'll have to contact the author.
        3y ago
KennyBlanken 3y ago
> Nintendo has been issuing copyright strikes against content creators that use gameplay footage of their games, even though it is clearly allowed by their Content Guidelines Would everyone please stop pretending like a company's "content guidelines" can enforce any restrictions on fair use purposes? Making a cosplay costume of a character is fair use. Making a video of you playing a game is fair use. Fan art about a video game is fair use. 'Content guidelines' pretend to "give" you rights you already have, and then threaten to take them away if you do thinks they don't like.

spiderfarmer 3y ago

How do companies the size of Nintendo decide to take down content? Is it a whole procedure or is there a low level employee who's task it is to mark checkboxes who when he/she has a bad day decides to block everything in the pipeline instead of researching it? I can't believe Nintendo would choose to create drama like this before the release of their most anticipated game in years.

autoexec 3y ago
My guess, based on dealing with DMCA notices in other contexts, is that Nintendo doesn't decide at all. They hire a third party who scours the internet for stuff that might be infringing and that third party uses automated tools to fire off complaints and notices without anyone at Nintendo even being aware of any one particular instance at all until after it starts generating bad press. Youtube gets the notices and, without anyone at youtube ever being aware of any particular instance either, Google's automated system is what actually takes down a video. It's all automated systems sending notices and automated systems carrying out take downs, with companies who are routinely careless about sending DMCA notices on one end, and on the other end you have one of the richest corporations on the planet who still can't be bothered to pay a human to double check before they ruin someone's livelihood, or even to help clean up after their automation screws up.

charcircuit 3y ago

This is the danger of not properly licensing the content you use in your videos. In the video game industry it's very common for games to not license their game to be used in videos. These game companies like the fact they have the power to enforce their copyright on any video they so wish to have taken down. They don't want to give up this power so they avoid licensing it except to a very limited number of other companies. To help content creators be aware of what they will target they sometimes release guidelines [0]. These guideline are not actually a license to use the copyrighted material, but are just a guide for what will likely not be targeted by whoever is doing copyright enforcement. Content creators seem fine to not get rights for the games they make videos about and companies like the power they have to remove any video they wish so this trend continues. This is so common there are businesses like Twitch that are almost excessively built on top of this copyright infringement that game companies chosen not to pursue. [0] https://www.nintendo.co.jp/networkservice_guideline/en/index.html https://www.nintendo.co.jp/networkservice_guideline/en/index...

Aardwolf 3y ago
> These game companies like the fact they have the power to enforce their copyright on any video they so wish to have taken down. How does this help their profitability? Given that such videos are free advertising.
- charcircuit 3y ago
  >How does this help their profitability? You can maintain your brand image. If some really problematic usage of your IP happens you can get it taken down. If that person had a license for making videos of the game you wouldn't have the ability to get the content taken down and your brand image could be hurt which could affect sales and hurt profitability. >Given that such videos are free advertising. 99% of videos will be fine fine which is why you don't see companies getting videos taken down left and right. They reap the benefits of these videos, but they want to have the power to take things down just in case. Even if they never need to take anything down just having the power to just in case can be valuable to the company.
- jrockway 3y ago

noirscape 3y ago

This specifically happened because the guy put a financial bounty on a multiplayer mod for Breath of the Wild. Nintendo has always been fairly straightforward on this sorta thing if you look at their actions: 1. Don't make them care. Don't draw attention to yourself, just do what you want to do. Relatedly, don't talk to Vice, Polygon, Kotaku or any other authoritative source because then you'll be competing with Nintendo in the press for relevance, and that'll make them upset. 2. No piracy. Nintendo has a very wide definition of piracy, which includes emulation if it has the possibility of being done through piracy (which is most emulation but not most emulation development). Specifically don't do anything that can directly enable piracy, such as dumping ROMs or say... trying to organize a Melee tournament using a Dolphin netplay mod. 3. No money. Money makes things complicated and will make Nintendo care. Just straight up - you're going to need to do it pro bono. If you expect financial benefits of any kind, just go elsewhere. 4. Don't directly compete with Nintendo - no direct sequels or remakes. Otherwise they'll turn a blind eye. This guy violated point 1 and point 3; tech blogs wrote about him and he put up a financial bounty for it.

realusername 3y ago
Those aren't up to them to decide, there's laws. Emulation, romhacks and mods are perfectly legal whatever they think.
- derefr 3y ago
  These creators are almost always benefitting from Nintendo voluntarily turning a blind eye to the creator’s use/sampling of Nintendo IP in their content without any kind of IP licensing agreement. Whether some behavior is legal or not, if Nintendo doesn’t like it, they are free to respond by taking issue with the actually-illegal thing you’re doing (using their IP without licensing it.) A.k.a. “If you don’t want to play by my rules, I’m taking my ball with me when I go home.” (Keep in mind that by a strict interpretation of IP law, everyone making gameplay videos of Nintendo’s games owes Nintendo royalties on revenue from those videos, just as much as musicians that sample other artists’ music owe those musicians royalties on revenue from that music.)

snvzz 3y ago

There's no concept of "fair use" in Japan. Nintendo has a hard time with the fact Japan law does not apply in the west.

jrockway 3y ago
Isn't copyright based on international treaties? They no doubt signed the same constitution-overriding stuff we did.
Algent 3y ago
This isn't that simple, Youtube having a legal existence in many countries they have to respect more than just US laws.
- jeroenhd 3y ago
  They definitely must follow Japanese law for their Japanese customers. That doesn't mean Japanese law applies to all of their customers worldwide, though.
  - charcircuit 3y ago
    The copyright law that applies to a work is the copyright law from the country the work was created in. Japanese works fall under Japanese copyright law for all customers worldwide.
    - schrijver 3y ago
      Source? Copyright applies where the work is distributed. If you sell a counterfeit Japanese book in Germany, the Japanese publisher will need to sue in a German court. That makes sense because Japanese laws and courts have no bearing on German nationals (unless they are in Japan). Copyright still works internationally, since what constitutes infraction in your own country is probably an infraction abroad as well. Most countries have signed the Berne convention and have very similar copyright laws. Yet there are still differences, for example the length of time it takes for a work to enter in the public domain, and local markets reflect this. Things are complicated online, since platforms based in one country distribute to many other countries, and so they open themselves up to liabilities in many countries. Where platforms don’t have the resources to differentiate by country, they might choose the most restrictive available interpretation…

techaqua 3y ago

remember when nintendo tried to make their own mcn. basically if you make nintendo related content, nintendo will take a pay cut or you get copystrike.

jeroenhd 3y ago

Video game companies seem to have this weird urge to hurt any fan created content any way they can. I don't understand why anyone would put effort into Nintendo games by the way their business practices are just incompatible with how internet entertainment works. It's simply a terrible company to be a fan of. It's quite comedic how they build some of the most hackable consoles while at the same time pretending that any kind of emulation will get you the death sentence. A real bummer, because many of their devices are quite good handheld emulation machines for old games that no reasonable person will ever pay for again and the comparatively low specs of their hardware make games excellently playable on other platforms.

smcl 3y ago

I think there's another side of this that is being glossed over. While Nintendo are being a bit overbearing (and IMO self-defeating), they're sending these takedowns to YouTube who are happily executing them, and are seemingly uninterested as to whether they're without merit. Now I know that this is nothing new, YouTube and Google generally are famously indifferent to their users, but I think it's important not to ignore this.

stefandesu 3y ago
Yeah, this is definitely an issue that comes up with YouTube again and again, and it doesn't seem to be getting any better. I still understand that creators stick with YouTube, especially because there's nothing like it out there in terms of reach for long-form content.
coldpie 3y ago
Well, YouTube is kind of in a hard place. There are massive penalties for hosting others' IP, and basically no penalties for not doing that. The incentives are strongly aligned with taking content down if there's any hint that it may be infringing. If you'd like that to change, then you need to change the incentives -- the laws. YouTube is just operating in the system Disney and Cher created.
- smcl 3y ago
  I understand that laws are weird and that you'd want to err on the side of caution. I don't understand that it's so easy to get someone's content taken down to the extent that (for example) a DMCA takedown request is a common retaliatory tactic between YouTubers when they're beefing, and that there's little recourse other than getting enough people Tweeting about it that a YouTube exec stumbles upon the issue during their morning coffee. I also don't understand why there's seemingly no process to revisit such strikes, or get a human involved in the process. I guess there's some section of their TOS stating "we might just nuke your account because we feel like it" so they're legally in the right to do whatever they feel like. Just feels like such a weird way to operate such a business - to just go completely hands-off and let all participants tear each other apart via content reporting or takedown requests.

jchw 3y ago

Well, regardless of what you think about who is in the right morally and legally, I will say one thing: Nintendo sure knows how to take an opportunity for good PR and turn it into a PR nightmare for essentially no gain. Nintendo definitely manages to succeed in spite of their corporate antics and absolutely not as a result of them.

bragr 3y ago
>Nintendo sure knows how to take an opportunity for good PR and turn it into a PR nightmare for essentially no gain. Nintendo definitely manages to succeed in spite of their corporate antics and absolutely not as a result of them. Counterpoint: maybe none of the people they have drama with are their core customers. Nintendo seems to have a similar "Disney Adult" problem as Disney where you have a population of vocal adults who think they are the core customer, but in reality the company moved on to selling to those people's children or grandchildren years ago.
- viraptor 3y ago
  Pointcrow is not really their customer. He's their free marketing service. Most of his content seems to be based on Nintendo games - and that works for at least some of the actual customer base. Reviews and trailers are fun and all, but I think every game I bought in the last few years was a result of me seeing a stream of someone having fun playing it. I know others who do the same. They essentially put an advertisement of how much they suck in place of a free ad space they were given.
  - bragr 3y ago
    >He's their free marketing service. Is he though? Looking about his top videos, I see lots of "pro gaming" or speedruns, so I circle back to my earlier question of who is their core audience? I suspect this kind of content doesn't move the needle on units sold very much.
    - viraptor 3y ago

jtwebman 3y ago

They own the IP they can do what they e want. Seem like every few years some creator freaks out because they didn't like what you did and take it down. It is in their right to do so. Free Use can only be decided by a judge in the US. Until more band together a fight then nothing will change.

fasterik 3y ago
Fair use means exactly the opposite of what you're saying. Companies who own IP can't do whatever they want. If use of a copyrighted work is transformative, it falls under fair use. It's true that it's up to the courts to decide whether specific works are transformative, but that doesn't justify game companies abusing individual content creators who don't have the financial means to defend themselves.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  > If use of a copyrighted work is transformative, it falls under fair use. Not necessarily. Being transformative may weigh in favor of fair use, but it isn’t automatically fair use.

senko 3y ago

From 5:35 in the video: > So, if you've uploaded any video that features any Nintendo content no matter how transformative or directly in line with their published guidelines, you are at risk. Nintendo does as it always does. The problem here is in the copyright, DMCA and related laws that allow such broadly nonsensical interpretation that large corporation with a sizable legal team can successfully threaten anyone touching stuff that falls under the copyright. Yeah, it might be fair use, and how big is your legal budget again?

egypturnash 3y ago

Cut and paste from the tiny little transcript window because I don't wanna watch this guy talk for eight minutes and maybe you don't want to either: ---- so Nintendo has decided to take down the my and other content creators videos I ask that you watch this whole video so you understand the entire situation because it affects you and the content creators that you may Support also this is a prepared statement reviewed by my lawyer so if it seems like I'm reading from a script uh it's because I am my main hope is that if somebody at Nintendo watches this they will listen to what I have to say and consider reversing the decision to claim these videos so uh hi I'm Eric or Point Crow I make videos playing games sometimes in strange ways but for today it's important for you to know that on occasion I modify the games I play and explore what happens when the game mechanics are a little different most recently I modified The Legend of Zelda breath of the wild to become a multiplayer game to be clear I have never encouraged piracy of Nintendo's games the mods that I've commissioned are not being sold and all of the code is custom meaning that they are free of Nintendo assets on April 6th one week ago Nintendo decided to block all four videos that I put up on YouTube playing the multiplayer mod I appealed their decision as I'm very much in line with their content guideline policies we'll go over that in a moment and these videos are fair use Nintendo then escalated and issued a copyright strike against my YouTube channel not once but twice rather than bundle the videos all into one copyright strike Nintendo issued a copyright strike for one video and then bundled the other three into another strike deliberately putting my channel in danger but not taking it down completely I was able to get an email address for Nintendo and sent a message asking that we discuss what's going on and try to reach an amicable resolution that would make both parties happy I heard nothing back so far here's that email if you would like to read it so the next day Nintendo claimed 24 more of my videos from my channels most of them are modded content a lot of them are breath of the Wild but not all of them are this is key they also claimed videos containing footage from Super Mario Odyssey the Pokemon series and Wii Sports Resort from my channel the most surprising one though was a claim from one of my first videos back in 2019 marrying seiden and a bookshelf to create hyrule's first car it's just a regular vanilla gameplay video of breath of the wild these takedowns aren't exclusive to my channel either over the course of the next couple days Nintendo was taking down videos from other channels as well Croton another very prominent YouTuber has had at least 10 live streams and two videos removed importantly one of those videos is simply a challenge video detailing how the game would be played if the player decided to explore Zelda with certain restrictions the player has imposed on themselves these takedowns may have started with modded content but they have spiraled into something else entirely so now you know what's happening uh at this time my channel has had 29 videos taken down two copyright strikes and Nintendo does not seem to be stopping the removal of videos from other creators on YouTube so let me really Levy the importance of this on you the viewer Nintendo is sending takedowns and Strikes against the creators showing content of their games it's not just modded content they've shown that they're striking down regular gameplay videos as well it's sporadic and their enforcement of their copyright is incredibly uneven the thing is without even considering fair use all of these videos are very clearly in line with Nintendo's own game content guidelines for online video and image sharing platforms which I will include in the description below I will also read it for you here from their FAQ what types of content are acceptable under the guidelines what types of content are not acceptable we encourage you to use Nintendo game content in videos and images that feature your creative input and commentary for example let's play videos and video game reviews are within the scope of the guidelines however you may not simply upload a live stream of an existing Nintendo video gameplay footage without your own creative inputs or a copy of content created by someone else for example mirror copies of Nintendo promotional trailers tournaments music soundtracks gameplay sequences and art collections are outside the scope of the guidelines you might argue that modded content is in violation of these guidelines but historically that's not the case the terms of service for the Legend of Zelda says you cannot modify the game but it also says that you cannot stream it you cannot make videos of it and you cannot otherwise broadcast it a Nintendo's game content guidelines changes this though by providing a license on top of the existing terms of service which modifies the terms of service for Content creators all of the videos that they have taken down are in compliance with their own policies I use Nintendo game content in my videos and they are all featuring my creative input and commentary throughout the duration of the medium now this is a little scary because the president that they set uh with this case may apply heavily for their upcoming release of The Legend of Zelda tears of the Kingdom as per their decisions to take down gameplay and Challenge videos alongside the modified content it'll be difficult for any content creator to post Creative Concepts without having the fear of Nintendo exercising their copyright over video that is in line with their own policies in fact what they've demonstrated here is that they will ignore their own policies and licenses to selectively enforce their intellectual property so if you've uploaded any video that features any Nintendo content no matter how transformative or directly in line with their published guidelines you are at risk giving these decisions I'm hesitant to post videos of myself playing tears of the Kingdom even with my creative input and commentary for fear that they will also be taken down I hope that is not the case so uh what am I going to do nothing um I can't do much of anything about this other than plead with Nintendo and move away from this kind of content my other option is to appeal the dmca notices and risk a multi-million dollar lawsuit so even if I'm in the right here that risks my channel my livelihood and the livelihoods of my team I don't want to go through that and I'm left questioning the future of the content that I'm allowed to make so I'm releasing this video informing you all of what's going on in this community and using this as an open letter to Nintendo so here's my explicit message to Nintendo I love the games that you make the stories you tell the ideas that you explore from giving me the closest moments that I've had with my friends to my Mom calling every electronic device I own a Nintendo you mentioned in your content guidelines that you are humbled every day but the loyalty and passion for Nintendo's Games characters and world and respect that we want to be able to express ourselves creatively by sharing our own videos and images using content from your game if you truly respect us and are humbled by this community don't take this creativity away from us these channels you've targeted these videos you're claiming are from some of the people that are most passionate about your games you're stifling that imagination and punishing those who want to share it with others when they do it in the way that you have outlined for us creators please remove these strikes and claims or at least start a dialogue with us so we can figure this out and all move forward with the excitement I'm sure you would love to see about your future games you have my contact information already from the dmca and the email that I've sent uh I'll be waiting eagerly for your response so thanks ---- (This is YouTube's auto-generated transcript, no editing or formatting applied.)

colonwqbang 3y ago

It makes me wonder why people like him bother with it in the first place. Why help market Nintendo games and contribute to their ecosystem, when they clearly don't care about you at all and will happily throw you under the bus. This isn't anything new, Nintendo has been behaving this way for many years.

asynchronous 3y ago
Unfortunately it’s because Nintendo despite their draconian approach and awful antics makes darn good video games.

phendrenad2 3y ago

Not mentioned in the headline: most of the videos were of modded versions of the game, which likely violate the DMCA.

nfriedly 3y ago

I have some fond memories of Nintendo games from my childhood, but I've basically sworn them off as an adult, due specifically to these kinds of abusive behaviors. I'd kind of like to play Breath of the wild, or some of the newer Pokemon games. But not enough to support this kind of nonsense. These days, most of my gaming happens on a PC, with a little bit on Android. If a game isn't available there, then I just probably won't play it. (I know there's emulation, but meh.) When my son got interested in gaming, I didn't buy him a switch - we built a PC together. Nintendo is slowly but surely killing themselves.

dmcgillen 3y ago
As much as I commend your position, having just recently bought a Switch with Mario Odyssey and BotW I would say you're missing out on some really good stuff. I've had about a 5 year or so gap in gaming due to adult life getting in the way, but it's been really fun getting back into it. Their behaviour in this regard really does disappoint me though, it's a completely unnecessary way to treat some of your biggest fans.
- nfriedly 3y ago
  Yeah, fair enough. I'm not going to fault anyone who doesn't take the same stance that I do. It's a bit easier for me partially just because I don't have all that much time to game anyways. I think I might average 1 game a year completed, and a few others started - I just finished Control, after starting it sometime last year.

Zuiii 3y ago

I wonder why amaricans are silent with a foreign company abusing laws to stifle and destroy their budding talent pools like this. Each time nintendo twists the law to dish out illegal abuse, it drives talented people elsewhere. I'm sure it already had a real negative effect on US overall ability to compete with other countries. I guess I just don't understand why they don't get penalized for abusing the rights of US citizens.